The thing that bugs me about all the press – and this may just be because we’ve all been so close to this project for so long – is the association with Hulu. In my mind, and to your point, Hulu isn’t the “network” for If I Can Dream, it’s a delivery platform that happens to have a cut-down, episodic piece of content attached to it. The real power of IICD is the always-on nature of it. Perhaps time will prove me wrong, but I believe that the Hulu “episodes” will serve more as a summary catch-up for peeps who missed out on a few days of voyeuristic engagement.

I’m also with you on the Flash question, although HTML5 is not a “threat to its system” in the same way at all. HTML5 is an open standard which Apple can implement any way they want (you may have already noticed that different browsers implement some HTML5 elements in different ways). Flash can only be rendered by a plugin from Adobe which Apple has no way of tinkering with at all.

I totally agree with you about how Apple has really mastered monetizing their products and why they would banish Flash as ever being an allowed technology in their devices.

The standards based web is starting to really turn real but even with the massive advancements it still saddens me to watch people turning away from flash. I mean I could be bias because I started my career as a Flash Developer but in all seriousness I still think there is something to be said about some of the experiences that flash can bring.

With the right content delivery be it XML, XHTML, etc a combination of technologies for delivering interactive and multimedia I think can pack a punch.

I mean sure some of the Flash stuff is really just eyegasms on a page but there’s something to be said about a well-done seamless hybrid site.

One thing is for sure Flash Developers need to get off their asses cause if they niche themselves too much they are going to go extinct like the dinosaurs http://bit.ly/cETVNG

I did find this pretty funny though for what it was worth http://tcrn.ch/bgMc3l

Biggest drawback is multitasking – for sure. It’s just a matter of time until that changes.

I agree with your comment, if this idea had lived in the digital space it could have been much more spreadable by adding a social element. However, it is not often that one comes across this type of interactivity (limited though it is) in a novel, so I thought it was worthy of note. To me it’s an example of how the opportunities we take for granted in the digital world can be used to enrich more “traditional” storytelling experiences.

Thanks for commenting,

Marci

I think the publisher and the Nabakov family/trust missed an opportunity to go beyond interactivity with this, though. If you are going to facilitate the self-empowerment of the consumer to interact with content, but that interaction is localized and limited (i.e., not shareable), it essentially dies on the vine. It is not, as Henry Jenkins puts it, “spreadable.”

How wonderful it would be if readers could find a way to share their experiences with this book – not just the narrative but the whole experience.

[Of course, anyone could set up a site to allow this to happen, but whoever does now controls the attention, space, and conversations about the book. So if it isn't Nabakov's family, they only gain an indirect benefit in the form of potentially more sales as a result of the increased awareness]

Interactivity is just the first of many steps that lead to an engaged and sustained audience.